top of page

LATEST ISSUES 18th December, 2025

Dec 18, 2025

5 min read

Mark Stock

0

23

0

The following email threads are a continuation from yesterdays communication with Sadie Bell, Director of Information Governance HIOWHealthcare Trust, as published by me in LATEST ISSUES # 17TH December, 2025 during the very early hours of another sleepless morning.


I then wrote and sent the following email to Jason Russell, Senior Manager for Public Access at the JIMU Police, on Wednesday, 17th December, 2025 at 7.26am


‘JASON RUSSELL

Another week has gone by without a response from you, not even a polite courtesy update.

Please would you respond to my enquiry and let me know

'Do you have any updates on resolving the 'national systems issue'?

Confirming that I wish to make SAR of ALL outstanding data referencing me and the Prevent referral of me that is held on the PMCT national system and ALL other databases, including Dawn Jenks' formal assessment forms.

To reiterate, I need access to ALL data by the end of January, 2026 latest in order to pass on to lawyers affiliated with Prevent Watch.'

AND

Please would you confirm or deny if it is YOU and or YOUR office who are now instructing Sadie Bell, Director of Information Governance, HIOWHealthcare Trust, NOT to comply with a recent SAR request. The email from Sadie Bell to me below is in response to my request for the communication between Gemma Stubbington and the Safeguarding Board of HIOWHealthcare Trust that allegedly details advisement to go ahead with the referral of me to PREVENT. 

The denial of access to records is now, apparently authorised under an exemption 'Section 45(4)(b) of the Data Protection Act 2018' and advised by the police.

This is clearly another over-reach and makes absolutely NO sense.

Sadie Bell's team have ALREADY forwarded part of the information that I have requested relating to me and a PREVENT referral, including the actual PREVENT forms completed by Gemma Stubbington. Why was the information already disclosed to me NOT also exempt?

NO information relating to me and a PREVENT referral should be exempt under Section 45(4)(b) of the Data Protection Act 2018 because there have been NO criminal offences committed by me and no criminal penalties accrued by me. The entire PREVENT referral was actioned and closed almost immediately because of a lack of merit. There are no crimes or criminal penalties!!!

I need access to ALL documents, including EVERYTHING held by Sadie Bell's team so that I can present to lawyers by the end of January 2026.

PLEASE ADVISE.

Yours sincerely,

MARK STOCK’

 

Jason Russell replied at 9.35am

 

‘Dear Mr Stock

 I can confirm that as outlined previously, I’m making enquiries to ensure that your request is dealt with in compliance with the Law by the correct Data Controller.

 Once I have a decision and this is resolved, I will respond to you.

 Kind Regards 

Jason Russell

Senior Manager for Public Access

JOINT INFORMATION MANAGEMENT UNIT’

 

My reply to Jason Russell, opening with a quote from my latest blog entry, was sent at 9.53am

 

‘The whole referral to PREVENT process had moved with the terminal velocity of a grand piano falling from the top of the Burj Khalifa!

But then I demanded accountability.

It has been 6 MONTHS since the Prevent referral was made. I have been demanding accountability ever since but where have I got?

Making a referral of somebody to PREVENT is really easy, facilitated with greasy zealousness and fast-tracked with draconian police efficiency but holding people to account is RESISTED, OBSTRUCTED and or IGNORED.

I have been treated like a criminal or worse, criminals seem to have more rights than me.

YOU already have information on your database that FALSELY accuses me of harassment and stalking as of Sept 2022. I have made multiple requests to have that FALSE information removed but YOU refuse to remove it.

The PREVENT referral was in response to my lawful right to peacefully protest against YOUR decision not to remove that FALSE information.

That PREVENT referral has been actioned and CLOSED.

YOU now appear to be obstructing my lawful right to access information held by HIOWHealthcare and their Safeguarding Board.

I need URGENT access to ALL information held by HIOWHealthcare and their Safeguarding Board AND on ALL police and Home Office databases so that it can be scrutinised by lawyers at Prevent Watch before the end of January 2026.

I need to hold people and institutions rightfully to account and I am running out of time.

MARK STOCK’

 

I then returned to Information Governance at the HIOWHealthcare Trust,

Email sent to Sadie Bell, Data Protection Officer Information Governance HIOWHealthcare Trust, on Wed 17th December 2025 at 10.14am

 

‘Good Morning Sadie,

I have been in contact this morning with Jason Russell, Senior Manager for Public Access, JIMU Police.

I am making a fairly well informed guess that it is Russell who is demanding you withhold the information I am requesting.

This is particularly frustrating because Russell has already proved himself staggering incompetent and been corrected multiple times for incorrect decisions based on poor knowledge of GDPR Data Protection law. I will ultimately be making good use of the government designated, PREVENT procedure https://www.gov.uk/guidance/make-a-complaint-about-prevent and robustly complain about EVERY aspect of this case and EVERYONE involved. I will also accept any legal advice offered in the new year that recommends taking individuals and institutions to court, without exception.

In the meantime, please can I ask, again, for copies of the 'local' and 'national' 'guidelines' that everyone at HIOWHealthcare followed when referring me to PREVENT. 

I am absolutely certain that you should not be withholding  'local' and 'national' 'guidelines' from me.


Thank you

Yours sincerely,

Mark’

I copied the Head of Nursing at CMHT, The Bridge Centre, Joe Jackson in on the email to Sadie Bell at 10.16am with the question


‘Joe?’


Followed by the following email to Joe Jackson at 4.43pm


‘Please Joe,

Please can I ask, again, for copies of the 'local' and 'national' 'guidelines' that everyone at HIOWHealthcare followed when referring me to PREVENT?


I asked you for both these 'guidelines' during my first meeting with you on the 3rd November, 2025, again in my email to you dated 19th November, 2025 and again THREE WEEKS ago when I met you on the 26th November, 2025. You agreed to forward them to me.

These are generic policy documents that should be available to anyone on request. 

Surely you, Sadie or anyone else within the Trust wont be citing Section 45(4)(b) of the Data Protection Act 2018 as reason to deny access to generic policy documents?

Please advise.

Mark’

 

 

…silence…crickets…



The failure to comply with my request for generic policy documents casts a malevolent shadow of doubt over everything that I had been told by Information Governance at HIOWHealthcare. Sadie Bell had insisted, on multiple occasions, that


 ‘We have been advised / informed by the police not to release any PREVENT information, under Section 45(4)(b) of the Data Protection Act 2018.

I am afraid I can not share the exact communications with you, as they are covered by PREVENT’


BUT, the inconvenient truth is that Sadie Bell’s department have ALREADY disclosed some information requested by me that IS ‘covered’ by PREVENT, including the actual PREVENT referral forms, COMPLETED by Gemma Stubbington!

I have since made a SAR specifically for the records of Gemma Stubbington’s meeting with the Designated Safeguarding Lead, likely Susan Corley, Head of the Safeguarding Board of  HIOWHealthcare. I have been informed by Gemma Stubbington herself and by recently appointed Head of Nursing at CMHT, The Bridge Centre, Joe Jackson, that it was the Safeguarding Board AND Police, who INSISTED that she go ahead with the PREVENT referral of ME.


So the obvious question becomes


‘WHAT ARE THE SAFEGUARDING BOARD OF HIOWHEALTHCARE AND/OR THE POLICE TRYING TO HIDE?’


This blatant attempt to avoid accountability just hardens my resolve.


This odious and reprehensible matter will be drafted for legal scrutiny in January 2026.

Dec 18, 2025

5 min read

0

23

0

Related Posts

Comments

Share Your ThoughtsBe the first to write a comment.
bottom of page